The 2 point conversion play call will bother me for eternity

Submitted by UMxWolverines on

http://www.elevenwarriors.com/2013/11/29782/michigan-notebook-buckeyes-…

OSU knew exactly what was coming on the 2 point conversion. I'll forever love the fact that Hoke went for two, but if it was Borges' call for the 2 point conversion he should be fired (I think he should still be, one game does not save your job). I'll probably be thinking about what would've happened if Devin had rolled out for the rest of the week non stop. And I know I'll never fully get over it. Shit.

MGoBoard
Football

Cope

December 1st, 2013 at 3:18 PM ^

It wasn't the whole game, just that one play.

That's unacceptable and it has me re-evaluating my desire to keep Borges based on our competitive performance in the game.

Joined: 10/07/2010

MGoPoints: 2648

funkywolve

December 1st, 2013 at 9:25 PM ^

UM lined up in that some formation before OSU called timeout.  I'm guessing UM had probably run that play at some point during the year so OSU saw it on film. 

That's what bugged me about the play call - UM came out in the same formation after OSU called a TO.

Joined: 10/08/2008

MGoPoints: 20221

An Angelo's Addict

December 1st, 2013 at 3:07 PM ^

Loved the call to go for two. I also didn't understand why we came out in the same formation that we rolled out before OSU took the timeout. Even the announcers said that now OSU "knows" what we were planning. Wouldn't it be common sense for the OC to come out in a different formation after the TO? I just don't get it man

Joined: 07/12/2011

MGoPoints: 7982

samber2009

December 1st, 2013 at 3:08 PM ^

I know it's silly, but I just can't let it go. We were just so close. Literally any other play would've been better.  Delayed Devin run or something. Sighhh what could've been.  Side note: This is the first year in a long time that I haven't heard any trash talk after that game. I think Ohio fans are still kind of shellshocked that they were 2 yards away from doom and disaster. 

Joined: 08/10/2009

MGoPoints: 2215

smitba6

December 1st, 2013 at 3:45 PM ^

Michigan has THREE wins in the last 14 years ('00-'13). I know this doesn't make any bit of the 11 losses feel better, but if you're so bent out of shape about the last decade and change, care enough to get the stat correct. Why is that significant? A certain publicly funded university located in Ohio had exactly THREE wins against Michigan from 1986-1999, another 14 year span. In terms of the original post, I am with the consensus here that the decision was not only awesome, but correct, and the play call left me wondering what could have been. We don't know how hurt Gardner was and how that may have affected the decision not to roll him out with some run pass option. It was encouraging to see Borges remove his head from his ass and realize that the offense he wants to run has to include an effective screen. I think this came from Brady Hoke chewing him out behind closed doors, instead of in a public forum as many here expect him to do after any poor performance. We'll see how the bowl game goes, but I think this team and this staffed matured a tremendous amount this year, as painful as it was for all of us to watch.

Joined: 04/21/2013

MGoPoints: 10

WyoBuckeye

December 1st, 2013 at 3:22 PM ^

I think many Ohio State fans, including myself were very impressed with the heart and tenacity with which Michigan played.  I do think the better team won, but Michigan played a game that was worthy of the storied rivalry.  There's little shit-talking today because of repsect for what Buckeye fans saw from Michigan out on the field.

As for the decision to go for two, I think that it was a good one since not having a reliable PK in OT could have been a big handicap.  Normally, if it was a home game, I think the decision would have been a poor one.  I can't comment too much on the playcall itself.

 

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 7

titanfan11

December 1st, 2013 at 3:08 PM ^

When Hoke held up the 2...I was completely expecting (or hoping for, not sure which) the same play they scored the TD on...put Funchess alone, make them double him if they choose...and either toss one up to him or roll the other way 

Joined: 10/13/2013

MGoPoints: 3255

Cope

December 1st, 2013 at 3:09 PM ^

That they knew what two plays it could be and we did one of those exact plays. Can't believe we could be so predictable. Shouldn't we be able to do any number of plays than have two scripted two point conversions plays prepared? And how are they so transparent (used before? predictable?) that OSU's coaches know them by heart?

Joined: 10/07/2010

MGoPoints: 2648

MGoMarc

December 1st, 2013 at 3:13 PM ^

Biggest play of the year and that's what they come up with? A play that had limited options and didn't create any mismatches or try to get the defense out of position. It was just lazy.

Joined: 03/10/2009

MGoPoints: 466

FrankMurphy

December 1st, 2013 at 5:35 PM ^

When people talk about Michigan's bad luck over the past few years, I think they mean as compared to our rivals down south. Despite Jim Tressel being an unproven commodity at the FBS level, hiring him to replace John Cooper worked out beautifully for Ohio. When Tressel's misdeeds landed Ohio in hot water, they backed into an upgrade at head coach because of the timing of Urban's departure from Florida. Meanwhile, despite Rich Rod's wildly successful run at WVU, hiring him blew up in our faces. When it came time to replace him, we had the perfect Urban-caliber candidate in our sights, but we missed out on him when the 49ers job opened up. We did catch a lot of breaks in 2011, but that year seems like an outlier now.

Joined: 08/19/2008

MGoPoints: 31951

Yeoman

December 1st, 2013 at 3:14 PM ^

Why did so many people want to see Gardner trying to run on one leg? It makes as much sense to me as wanting to have Denard throw with a rubber arm his last few games.

I know he was sort of able to run earlier, gingerly, in space when OSU defenders had turned their backs in coverage. That wasn't likely to happen at the goal line.

Some sort of up-the-middle run like we'd just seen earlier behind Kerridge, ok, but then everyone would have complained that Borges kept running the same play. But an option or rollout with a limping quarterback?

Joined: 06/08/2011

MGoPoints: 21390

Greg McMurtry

December 1st, 2013 at 3:59 PM ^

And OSU would not have expected a qb run/rollout as DG was limping. That's why you do it. The exact same formation and motion as before the timeout sealed Borgerg's demise for me. The whole game should be a chess match and you never let your opponent have an idea what will happen next.

Joined: 02/25/2009

MGoPoints: 135479

jmblue

December 1st, 2013 at 3:15 PM ^

Players say that all the time.  It doesn't mean much.  Even if they knew what was coming, Gallon was breaking open on the fade route and there was also a hole for Gardner to run, if he wanted.  For that matter, the throw to Dileo could have worked if it had gone to his outside shoulder.

The main problem on the play was that Kalis let his guy get through to pressure Gardner.  That forced Gardner to make a quicker throw than he wanted to, and it was too far to the inside of Dileo.

Joined: 11/07/2008

MGoPoints: 102802

Yeoman

December 1st, 2013 at 3:18 PM ^

The other problem was that Gallon got rerouted by the corner and was closer to Dileo than he should have been, as was his defender. That's probably what caused the throw to the inside, or at least that's what I saw at the time. I'll have to watch it again.

I didn't see anything particularly wrong with the call, but I wouldn't have expected anyone to like it no matter what it was.

Joined: 06/08/2011

MGoPoints: 21390

turd ferguson

December 1st, 2013 at 3:37 PM ^

Yeah, realistically, I would have loved the call if it had worked and hate the call now that it didn't.  (I loved Hoke's call to go for two.)  I haven't watched it closely since seeing it live, but my biggest gripe at the time was the lack of spacing.  Then again, that spacing might have come if the line had held up for another second or two.

The bottom line is that crappy call or not, the offense did more than enough to win yesterday.  I'm more tempted to crap on the defense than the offense.  Even there, OSU's offense is damn good and we were missing a bunch of guys up the middle who really could have helped (Pipkins, Ross, Wilson).

Plus, I haven't seen much discussion of this, but I would NOT have felt comfortable with a one-point lead and 30 seconds left.  In that situation, I think there's at least a 25-30% chance that OSU drives for the win.  Even a 75-yard TD pass wouldn't have surprised me.

Joined: 12/09/2009

MGoPoints: 26493